Ridgewood NJ, January – December 2016 Ridgewood Parking Permits – RPP Click Here for information and details. RPPs will be sold each business day from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. For both new and renewal RPPs, please bring a driver’s license, showing your Ridgewood address, and the registration(s) for the car(s) you wish to register. In addition, annual Ridgewood Resident Parking Stickers are available for free, which allow residents to park at the train station and will also be given as part of the RPP package. In order to obtain a Ridgewood Resident Parking Sticker (both new and renewal), please bring a driver’s license, showing your Ridgewood address, and the registration(s) for the car(s) you wish to register.
Passage nears in N.J. Legislature on hospitals-towns tax deal
JANUARY 6, 2016, 7:47 PM LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, JANUARY 7, 2016, 6:49 AM
BY LINDY WASHBURN
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
Last-minute negotiations on Wednesday set the stage for passage of a bill requiring New Jersey’s non-profit hospitals to contribute financially to their |host towns, a measure crafted after a landmark state Tax Court decision raised doubts about their century-old property tax exemptions.
The measure would put up to $25 million into the coffers of municipalities where hospitals are located statewide, including an estimated $2.7 million to towns in Bergen and Passaic counties.
The state’s largest hospital association, in a historic shift, agreed to the “community service assessments” — with exemptions for hospitals in serious financial trouble — required by state Senate President Stephen Sweeney’s proposed law. However, the measure is opposed by the League of Municipalities, whose members generally think towns deserve more from the hospitals.
Today, the Assembly Appropriations Committee is scheduled to vote on an amended version of Sweeney’s bill, and both houses of the Legislature are expected to vote on it Monday, Senate staff said. The measure, sponsored by Sweeney and state Sens. Robert Singer, a Republican of Monmouth and Ocean counties, and Joseph Vitale, a Middlesex County Democrat, has bipartisan support.
“The goal isn’t to put them out of business, or [see] how much can we get out of them,” Sweeney said of the state’s 60 non-profit hospitals. “But we wanted to acknowledge and come up with a fair process. You don’t want a free-for-all where everyone is going to court, everyone’s suing.”
The New Jersey Hospital Association’s endorsement came after a precedent-setting decision by state Tax Court Judge Vito Bianco in June opened the door to new tax bills — and lawsuits — for non-profit hospitals statewide. Bianco found that the non-profit Morristown Medical Center was not entitled to its property-tax exemption because its operations were hardly different from those of a for-profit business. The two sides in that dispute settled, with the medical center agreeing to pay $15.5 million over 10 years.
The bill would preserve the New Jersey Constitution’s century-old property tax exemption for non-profit hospitals, a protection sought by the hospital industry. But it assesses a daily fee of $2.50 per hospital bed, payable to the host municipality, to be used for police and fire protection or to lower property taxes. Five percent of the assessment would be paid by the municipality to the county government.
Two amendments were negotiated Wednesday, and the measure was scheduled for votes in the Legislature’s final voting sessions. One amendment added an inflation clause, increasing the assessment by 2 percent annually. The other changed an exemption for hospitals in danger of bankruptcy or close to violating their bond covenants by allowing the finances of a hospital system, rather than an individual hospital, to be considered when exemptions are decided.
back by popular demand RIDGEWOOD’S own RESTAURANT WEEK 2016! January 17-January 21, January 24-January 28, Sunday through Thursday, experience fine dining in Ridgewood for only $25.16. For these ten days, participating restaurants are offering you the chance to experience dining in Ridgewood like never before. Each business will prepare a 3course, (prix-fixe menu for you at $25.16 +tax/tip/beverage.
Please note: We have added a
Catering, Wine and Specialty offerings.
PLEASE NOTE THERE ARE A FEW EXCEPTIONS
WITH DETAILS,PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
ENJOY!
Visit the following participating businesses.
Call for details.
Fish Urban Dining
201-857-5151
It’s Greek to Me
201-612-2600
LaTour, A French-American Grill
201-445-5056 – lunch only
Mediterraneo Restaurant
201-447-0022
Memoire Restaurant
201-857-8899
Novo
201-444-4910
Park West Tavern & Loft
201-445-5400
Pearl Restaurant
201-857-5100
Planet Swirl FRO-Yo & Grill
201-857-455
Raymond’s
201-445-5125
ROOTS Steakhouse
201-444-1922
Sakura-Bana Restaurant
201-447-6525
The Office Beer Bar & Grill
201-652-1070
Village Green Restaurant
201-445-2914
Catering
Chestnut Catering
201-445-3031
From Scratch Ridgewood
201-981-8606
Specialty Offerings
Ben & Jerry’s
201-689-1122
Carlo’s Bake Shop
201-962-9080
Super Cellars Fine Wines & Marketplace
201-444-0012
The Wine Seller
201-444-3300
See you in Ridgewood!
FREE parking on Sunday
Free Parking after 6:00pm
Ridgewood voted “26th best place to live in America”
Visit historic “downtown Ridgewood”
NJ/NY Transit friendly
experienceridgewood.com
As many of you have likely read, Mayor Aronsohn yesterday proposed that the traffic garage be altered to the smallest of the three options.
On the surface, this seems like a generous compromise and that he is listening to the needs of Mount Carmel and the rest of us in town but I am concerned that he is still not hearing us.
Let me explain:
1) The footprint for the smallest proposed garage is the same as the biggest. More than anything, this is the most unseen problem. The proposed garage will in essence extend nearly to the center mark on the center line of Hudson street. As resident Rob Kotch put it today, “It’s like trying to fit an elephant into a VW bug.” So, the width is of equal concern as the height. This will affect traffic in that area in a major way, particularly with regard to the parishioners of Mount Carmel.
2) The only traffic study already commissioned by the town was conducted between 7-9am and 3-6pm on the same day in October. The study itself states: “We recommend that an analysis be performed to incorporate the intersections of South Broad Street & East Ridgewood Avenue and North Broad Street & Franklin Avenue into our traffic model as these intersections are already operating at capacity and may affect access to the surrounding land uses. We recommend that a study be performed to include Passaic Street as Hudson Street and Passaic Street operate as a pair within the roadway network…It is also our opinion that the study should include the intersections of South Broad Street & East Ridgewood Avenue and North Broad Street & Franklin Avenue as these intersections are operating near capacity and have a noticeable effect upon traffic.”
In other words, more study is needed to do this properly, which of course brings us to–
3) On September 30th, the Village Council voted in favor of doing a comprehensive traffic study that specifically includes the parking garage. It is essential we make sure the council follows through with this particular study and do so before anything further is done with the proposed garage.
Ridgewood NJ, Registration for the Winter 2016 session will be held on Tuesday, January 19th, 5:30 to 6:30 p.m., at the Community Center, Village Hall, 131 North Maple Avenue, Ridgewood
This program, for boys and girls age 5 to 15, is designed to enhance self-esteem, self-discipline and safety awareness! Students are placed into classes according to age and ability. This is an ongoing program.
Classes will be held at Community Center, Village Hall, 131 North Maple Avenue on Tuesdays after school for a 10-week session, January 26 through April 5 (no class Feb 16). The cost is $100.00. Uniforms are highly recommended and are not included in the registration fee. Click on details below. Call KidSafe at 973-284-5650 for more information.
MY ESSAY ON WHY WE NEED YOU AT THE PARKING GARAGE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY NIGHT, 1/6.
By Dave Slomin.
Dear Supporters of Citizens for a Better Ridgewood,
This Wednesday night, 1/6, our Village Council is meeting (7:30 at Village Hall) to vote on a $12 million dollar bond to fund the biggest garage possible on the Hudson Street lot, near Sook and Mt. Carmel. We need Residents to attend… to be seen and be heard, to share your thoughts and concerns. The current plan is approximately 270’ long by 50+’ high… almost the size of a football field. Even if they opt for the smallest current option, it only shrinks by 10 feet in height. Once built, Hudson Street will be narrowed by 10’, street parking will be lost, neighboring buildings will be dwarfed, Mt. Carmel will be impacted and it will set a size and scale precedent which will be used by developers to argue for bigger, taller and denser multi-family buildings throughout our historic downtown.
That said, personally, I don’t think a parking deck, fittingly sized, is necessarily a bad idea at all… just like I don’t think that multifamily developments, fittingly-sized, are a bad idea at all. I just think the proposals we’ve seen on both are way too big, too dense, and too out of character to preserve the small-town feel of our beloved Village. For parking, in addition to a revised garage plan, the council should better review and advise on other options that spread new parking throughout our CBD, while also making drivers better aware of current parking options through signage.
I’d also like to hear more about possibly creating a Business Improvement District (BID) downtown, to get the landlords who will directly profit from this garage to chip in some more to help pay for it. That’s needed, because financing the garage is too tentative at present. The language of the actual referendum didn’t point out that much of the funding for the garage will come from increasing current meter rates in other key areas of downtown by up to 300-400% and increasing paid parking hours from 6pm to 9pm. The garage does not pay for itself. That’s pretty important stuff to know… or at least test out before you start writing checks that bank on its success. The last time Ridgewood increased parking hours to raise revenue, the Chamber of Commerce themselves complained and asked to have the hours paired back to 6pm. So before we spend $12MM, we should have a firmer idea how it’ll be paid back. Last time, some of these “givens” didn’t work so well.
Regarding size, in a November email, one Councilmember supported the notion that “quaint” is in the eye of the beholder. I’m not sure I know of any ‘beholders’ that would think the current garage plan is quaint. It’s not. As is, it’s massive. At a recent Council Meeting, the former Chairman of Ridgewood’s Historical Preservation Committee said he feared if we build this thing, we’ll look at it afterwards and think, “My, that’s a really big building.”
Backstory is… in November, our Council put forth a parking referendum, asking: “Do you support a proposal to finance and build a downtown parking garage on the Hudson Street lot… by bonding up to $15 million in public funds, which will be paid for principally, if not entirely, with parking revenues.” 65% voters voted “Yes.” However, even in voting “Yes,” many folks asked indicated they really voted more for “parking in general” than a singular giant garage. No one had any real idea how big the garage would be, as it was not determined. Yet, several Councilmembers are using this vote as if it were a ‘blank check’ in support of building the biggest edifice possible, or something close to it. That’s not right.
At the time of the referendum, Residents were essentially promised that we could vote “Yes,” and then negotiate the garage’s size later. Despite this promise, the Council so curtailed the subsequent public garage discussions that concerned residents could not give full voice to their opinions. At the main post-referendum garage meeting, initial public comment was limited to 30 minutes total (at five minutes per speaker) and then to a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker later, with no repeat speakers allowed (even though the meeting was not running late and some folks, myself included, could not finish their presentations within the 3 minute limit). I was actually asked to sit down and not speak again by a Village staffer. As such, there was no real negotiation on anything. The post-referendum garage selection process felt frustratingly preordained… like so much of what we are seeing happen in Ridgewood lately.
At the end of that meeting the Council polled 3-2 to bond for the largest garage option. This all-too-quick and ‘non-negotiated’ selection, which also wrongly occurred before the comprehensive traffic and parking study promised on 9/30/15 has been performed, raises further concerns with the “process” by which things are happening in Ridgewood.
So, in short, while we should use the opportunity of this referendum to make some smart and truly fitting decisions regarding parking, we should not rush into construction of the current over-sized garage options. Bigger for Ridgewood is not better.
Ridgewood Nj, Are increased meter rates killing down town Ridgewood more than the precised lack of parking ? Both Glen Rock ,Westwood both have lower parking rates Ridgewood and similar down town shopping districts or Central Business districts ( CBD’s ) .
The funny thing was given all the metered parking in the USA there is very little written on the effect of parking fees on shopping behaviors . We did find a pretty in depth study done in Massachusetts by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) which we will refer to in this article.
First it obvious to us that parking fees are only one of many variables in attracting shoppers to a CBD and creating a successful climate for merchants.
Rents, resident demographics , types of retail, destination locations and infrastructure all play a part.
The MAPC makes to interesting points about parking fees :
If free on-street parking means there are never any spaces available, charging for parking can improve business. The inability to find a parking space can be at least as much of a deterrent as the need to pay for one, so if charging a nominal fee for parking means that there are usually a few spaces available rather than there rarely being any spaces available, this may make the area more attractive to customers.( https://www.mapc.org/resources/parking-toolkit/strategies-topic/charging-parking )
In order for charging for parking to be effective, it must free up some parking spaces, which means it must impact travel behavior and reduce demand for parking. The question is whether discouraging people from parking discourages them from visiting the area, or simply encourages them to get there another way. Some possible impacts of charging for parking are given below. Whether potential shoppers who might be deterred by the price of parking are driven away or whether they simply find other ways to get there will depend in part on the availability and appeal of alternate ways to get to the area. ( https://www.mapc.org/resources/parking-toolkit/strategies-topic/charging-parking )
Again the key finding :
A large part of whether charging for parking will negatively impact businesses depends on how attractive the district is relative to other options. If there is a popular mall a short drive away providing many of the same goods and services with free parking, that can increase the likelihood that people will go elsewhere. On the other hand, if the downtown provides enough amenities and attractions – such as restaurants, bars, and appealing outdoor spaces – that cannot be replaced by a mall or isolated shopping center, the downtown is more likely to succeed.( https://www.mapc.org/resources/parking-toolkit/strategies-topic/charging-parking )
But an even more interesting conclusion about garage vs street parking :
Many people prefer to park in on-street parking rather than an off-street lot or garage because of the convenience. If off-street parking is limited or is primarily available as pay lots or garages while on-street parking is free, drivers will tend to circle blocks repeatedly looking for an open space on the street rather than paying to park. This congests streets with unnecessary traffic and pollutes the air with unnecessary emissions. It also means that expensive garages in which the municipality may have invested a significant amount of money may be underutilized and generate less revenue than expected. In this type of situation, implementing charges for on-street parking is critical to free up on-street spaces, encourage drivers to use pay lots or garages, and reduce “cruising” for parking. If off-street parking is priced, on-street parking should be priced as well, and should ideally be priced higher than structured parking. If off-street parking is mostly free surface lots and there is rarely a shortage of spaces available, low prices may be effective in encouraging people to use off-street options where available if convenience is not a top priority. ( https://www.mapc.org/resources/parking-toolkit/strategies-topic/charging-parking )
JANUARY 5, 2016 LAST UPDATED: TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2016, 1:21 AM
BY MATTHEW MCGRATH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
Local officials reacted cautiously to a proposal to charge hospitals a “community service” fee intended to offset, in part, property tax revenue that municipalities lose out on because of the non-profit status of most medical centers.
The proposed bill, which has cleared the state Senate but has not been posted for a vote in the General Assembly, would require hospitals to pay the towns in which they are built $2.50 per bed each day. If the bill becomes law, the fees would infuse about $2.7 million a year into six North Jersey communities that host the medical centers.
Not-for-profits are exempt from paying property taxes for certain uses. The proposal has been endorsed by the New Jersey Hospital Association, which hopes the payments will head off potential lawsuits from towns, but it is opposed by the League of Municipalities, whose members generally think they deserve more from the hospitals than the proposed law would allow.
Parking Utility Revenue – 01/01/15 – 11/30/15
January 5,2015
Boyd A. Loving
Ridgewood NJ, This data was obtained via a formal Open Public Records Act request.
As you can see, discounting the insurance company settlement received in connection with the theft of funds by Thomas Rica, the largest source of line item revenue for the Parking Utility during the noted time period is cash from on street parking meters.
Other significant revenue sources include: Fees for annual parking permits, rental fees for dedicated parking at the Route 17 Park & Ride, CBD employee parking at the former Ken Smith Motors facility, metered parking at lots on Cottage Place, North Walnut Street, Prospect Street, Station Plaza, Hudson Street, and the Route 17 Park & Ride, and revenue generated from the Park Mobile smart phone application.
This data should enable you to understand why a proposed increase in metered parking rates, coupled with a extension of the time metered parking is in effect, could significantly boost overall Parking Utility revenues.
I hope the holidays were kind to you and that the power issues at town hall are resolved. In case they aren’t, I’ve also included your other email address.
I wanted to discuss your recent Mayor’s Corner column which appeared in my inbox on January 2nd, where you spoke at length about civility.
Civility is something I am so with you about. It is too easy for people to forget this and to fall into behavior that is shortsighted and damaging to the fabric of our wonderful democracy. For you to keep bringing this up is exemplary and serves as a reminder of us all continuing to raise the bar in this regard.
It’s certainly reminded me, which is why I’m writing to you.
While I applaud your efforts to get things done (certainly as a filmmaker, I know the herculean effort it sometimes requires to do so) I also feel obligated to our community to speak out when I observe actions that fall below this bar of civility you and I hold ourselves to.
When I read in your January 2nd email/column that “We need to honor the votes cast by the 3,236 Ridgewood residents – a full 65% — who voted “yes” to building a 400-car parking deck at Hudson Street” it prompts me to speak out.
I speak out because of what you wrote in the pasted below email from November 1st with the subject heading “Parking Campaign – Please Read and Please Share” (bolding/CAPs from your original email included) :
“Tuesday’s referendum question is ONLY asking if residents support financing and building a garage on the Hudson Street lot. Nothing more. Nothing less. You will NOT be voting on the size, look or any other aspect of a proposed parking deck.”
As you clearly stated in that email, the vote was not a ‘yes’ for a 400 car parking garage. It was a non-binding referendum and to add parking at Hudson, bond the money and work with the public on scale and design.
Furthermore, your intention to vote a bond through the county if you don’t achieve a super majority from our council is not an acceptable path for one who wishes to respect the needs of one’s constituents and to maintain civility.
Lastly, as dictated by September 30th Village Council vote and based on the specificity of the comprehensive traffic study that you voted in favor of that evening, any movement on the traffic garage should be tabled until that study is complete. To override that vote and forcibly move forward with this bond puts the whole process into question.
Paul, many of us, myself included, are in favor of finding ways to assuage the parking situation in town. In the name of civility and for the sake of our village, I urge you to honor the vote you cast on September 30th with regards to completing the comprehensive parking study before moving forward with this traffic garage.
See you Wednesday night at 7:30pm.
Sincerely,
Dana
Dana H. Glazer
61 Clinton Avenue
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Paul Aronsohn <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Neighbor,
Election Day is just around the corner … and the campaign to build Ridgewood’s first parking deck has been gaining support. As I walk through town and talk to literally thousands of residents, I can tell you that people increasingly realize that a “yes” vote for the parking referendum is a “yes” vote for Ridgewood.
And in addition to the many individual residents who have expressed strong support, we now have three important letters of endorsement – all supporting this initiative, all encouraging a “yes” vote on Tuesday.
§ The Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee § The Ridgewood Historic Preservation Commission § The Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce President Without question, this is all very exciting.
Unfortunately, however, an anonymous mailer was sent to many Ridgewood homes this weekend – an anonymous mailer that was sent from a Newark Post Office and that is full of misinformation and distortions. And although no one was willing to take responsibility for the mailer, the language in it is strikingly similar to that used recently by others trying to undermine this important project for the Village.
So, let me set the record straight on some of the key issues being discussed:
ü Parking revenues – NOT taxes – would pay for this parking deck. We have commissioned an independent financial analysis that demonstrates that we could easily pay for a parking deck using only parking revenues. Here is that analysis.
ü There would be NO charge for parking on Sundays. We don’t charge for parking on Sundays. Period. That’s true now. That will be true if/when we build a parking deck.
ü There have been NO decisions taken with respect to meter times or rates. The independent financial analysis gave us a menu of options for paying for a parking deck without raising taxes. It would be up to the Council – with public input – to decide on any rate or time changes.
ü The size and appearance of the proposed parking deck have NOT yet been decided. Our design team – with a great deal of public input – has been developing renderings of what a parking deck could look like, but we have NOT decided on size or appearance. Those two issues would be decided after the vote on the referendum.
ü Tuesday’s referendum question is ONLY asking if residents support financing and building a garage on the Hudson Street lot. Nothing more. Nothing less. You will NOT be voting on the size, look or any other aspect of a proposed parking deck. Here is a copy of the official ballot question.
ü The anonymous mailer greatly DISTORTS the size of the proposed parking deck. As noted on the mailer in very small letters, “artist rendering, not to exact scale.”
ü A parking deck would likely lead to a significant DECREASE in traffic. According to our independent traffic consultant, a parking deck on the Hudson Street lot would have a very positive affect on the overall downtown traffic situation. The primary reason for this is that a parking deck would eliminate the need to drive around and around and around looking for a parking space. ü A parking deck would benefit ALL Ridgewood residents … commuters as well as shoppers/diners. The Council would have to decide how best to use the parking deck, but we would likely set aside some parking for commuters and some for those shopping, dining and working downtown.
ü Tuesday’s vote provides ALL Ridgewood residents with a unique opportunity. As outlined in my letter-to-the-editor, we have an opportunity to do something smart, important and wonderful for our community.
As always, thank you….
Best,
Paul
Paul Aronsohn, Mayor Village of Ridgewood @paularonsohn
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the setting of Fish Urban Dining is striking. Situated in a former Bank of America branch on East Ridgewood Avenue, the restaurant has 30-foot-high ceilings with six huge chandeliers, and its sleek dining room extends into what was the bank’s vault, complete with a five-ton steel door.
Jim and Karen DeGilio, the married couple who own the restaurant and a second Fish Urban Dining, in Asbury Park, opened their Ridgewood place in July. It has been packed ever since. It has high-quality seafood, attentive service and some excellent nonaquatic dishes, too.
“We pride ourselves on serving fresh, uncomplicated seafood with fair prices in a comfortable, fun setting,” Mr. DeGilio said in a phone interview following my visits.
Dave Symniuk, the executive chef at both locations, has worked with the couple for over a decade and oversees a team of cooks that handles day-to-day preparations.
RIDGEWOOD NJ ,Yesterday more than 500 PSE&G customers in the Village of Ridgewood lost power on Sunday due to an outage.
The outage was first reported by PSE&G at 11 a.m. The area effected was around Linwood Avenue and Oak Street . The Village website reported that
“Between 10 am & 12 pm there was a localized power outage that effected small areas by Linwood Ave. Village Hall was effected and lost communications for Website/Email. All system where back online by 2pm.”
Questions remain as to why the Village failed to use the emergency generators . The emergency generator would provide lights and some power to the computers. So why isn’t it used to supply the website ? If they are going to use the excuse that their e mail was down because of the power outage what would have happened if it were a real emergency ?
Ridgewood NJ, It seems that many who voted YES, voted ‘yes” for more parking. More parking yes , but not a monstrosity of a parking high-rise building being proposed for the Hudson Street parking lot. Many feel they were misled into thinking that a particular design had not been decided upon, even though this giant megastructure was the only option that was ever, in reality, on the table.
Everyone is quite aware of the peak demand parking shortage in our Village. The above is an image of what the proposed garage would look like. As you can see if dwarfs all the surrounding buikdings. If this monstrosity of a garage is not what you signed up for, when you voted YES for parking, please attend this Wednesdays Village Council meeting and let the Mayor and members of the Village Council know that this mega garage may work for Hackensack or Ft Lee but definitely does not fit in to the character of our Village. Furthermore, plans for any garage should be held off until the 4 impact studies are concluded. What is the point of having impact studies on traffic, etc… if our Village Council pushes through this huge garage.
Accident Closes Down East Ridgewood Ave, North Pleasant Intersection Sunday Afternoon in Ridgewood
January 3,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, The driver and passenger of a Ford Explorer were transported by ambulance to The Valley Hospital with non-life threatening injuries following a Sunday afternoon, 01/03 collision with a Ford Edge at the intersection of East Ridgewood and North Pleasant Avenues, Ridgewood. RIdgewood PD, EMS, and FD personnel responded to the 1 PM incident.
Both vehicles were removed from the scene by separate flatbed tow trucks. The Explorer appeared to have broadsided the Edge in the middle of the intersection. The accident remains under investigation by Ridgewood PD.
